Tensions Over Land Use Element Bring Out the Worst in Long Beach

As a writer, my city is important to me. As a previous outsider, Long Beach welcomed me, my pen, and my not-so-subtle opinions—that’s one of the many reasons I adore it so: we are a welcoming city, a blend of cultures and ideals and philosophies and peoples, and for the most part, we can often agree to disagree in the name of the greater good.

I still believe that.

And to be honest, no, I haven’t been subtle on my opinion about the backlash to the proposed updates to the Land Use Element (LUE), the document which guides development throughout the city. I haven’t been subtle…

And, even within my opinions… Even as I always try to provide some form of substantiation for what I argue… Even as I am data-driven, fueled little by anecdotes or conspiracy theories… I may be at fault for helping fuel a fire that doesn’t need to any more doused in anger or misinformation. Hell, even one comment thread between Pro-LUErs and Anti-LUErs had to be stopped, eventually leading to some form of agree-to-disagree with laughter after I was told I was “Mother Teresa in drag.” (Yup, I laughed, too.)

So, I was admittedly saddened after witnessing yet another crowd being led by anit-LUEr Robert Fox, the guy who snatched a microphone at one meeting from utterly harmless City staff trying to answer questions (as well as the one who called for my resignation in the comment thread of this article after pointing out factual errors on public posts, even despite the fact they’re labeled as opinion because I am a courteous writer when even calling out factual errors).

The most saddening aspect beyond the rudeness served to a City representative, whether you agree with her or not, trying to explain an essential document? There were cheers from Long Beachers at the idea of closing our city borders and denying immigrant protection—xenophobia and racism on a disturbingly public display—at a meeting for the LUE.

Director of Development Services for the City of Long Beach Amy Bodek took to Whaley Park to inform (a sea of older white) folks about the LUE. When she said that no update in the plan would result in “no one moving into the city,” the crowd erupted in cheers. During the cheers, one guy yelled, “And no sanctuary city [status]!” that promoted more cheering.

Yup, a whole roomful of angry folks cheered at the idea of no one moving into Long Beach because who cares about culture and diversity anyway? Why be a city that welcomes others—the distressed, the immigrants, the creators—when we can just tell everyone they’re just not our kind?

“Yup, a whole roomful of angry folks cheered at the idea of no one moving into Long Beach because who cares about culture and diversity anyway?”

Maybe they are people who respect the law and their ancestors came here fully within the legal framework at that time?

I only have fiscal risk (Federal) issues with Sanctuary City status, but many neighbors of a variety of backgrounds believe that the laws should be followed. Stating that those folks don’t care about culture and diversity is stereotypical at best and racist at worst.

By ‘fully within the legal framework at the time,’ you mean the mass displacement and genocide of Native Americans and indigenous Mexicans? Or are you talking about the stealing of land from folks that were already here in order to create the colonies? Sorry—just confused by what you mean by ‘legal framework.’

Brian, I’m sure there were people who got off the boat and shot a Native American from the gangplank to steal their land, but that isn’t what I was referring to. (Yep, most of the Native Americans got screwed, just like dozens or hundreds of local groups through history across the globe.)

I was referring to folks like some of my ancestors who applied for immigration with USA government representatives in the country where they were born, and over a period of time and some USA paperwork review, were given permission allowing them to immigrate from their country of birth to the USA – followed a prescribed “legal framework” immigration method and felt very fortunate to make it in.

Ah, gotcha. So the overriding of _other tribes’ laws_ which dictated the land in order for those to seek a better life from the monarchy of Britain can’t be applied to those overriding U.S. law to build a better lives for themselves. So… who is the authoritative law in this case and why does it apply to those seeking a better life?

Wow Brian, just wow.
Are you such a tool that you don’t understand the whys of history?
There was the American Nazi Party in the ’30s and early 40’s. I guess you’re unhappy they didn’t get their way?
The 1900 to 1925 KKK use to march in great numbers and openly advocated racist positions – they were trying to override U.S. law to build the life they felt they deserved. Does it piss you off that the KKK lost the fight?
So you’d be fine to go to what is now Arizona and have an Apache kill you for violating their laws?
Stop being a tool and grow up.

Nice non-sequitur. Before the American Nazi Party, before the KKK, there was tribal law, y’know, amongst those who lived here before Europeans arrived. I am asking you: is the law of those who lived here before European rule, which scored their rule through invasion, stealing, and genocide, override the law of those who were actually born here?

Also, you jump between ‘KKK losing a fight’ and so-called ‘Apaches killing [me]’—are they the same to you? Shouldn’t Apaches have the right kill people who were invading their land and murdering them, and shouldn’t racists be eradicated? (<–See? Two different subjects.)

As a middle-aged life long resident of this city, reading a comment such as “a sea of angry old white folks” is ageist & will not bring people on both sides closer to this issue. It seems to me that if a person is truly interested in “diversity” in this city, that would include people of ALL ages. I’m a Mexican American homeowner in this town. I have seen these changes. The concerns of the older adults, no matter what the ethnicity is, of Long Beach deserve to be heard as well.

I attended a LUE meeting last year. In my neighborhood. The same neighborhood where I’ve lived for forty-five years.

Just for demographics background, not judgement, that meeting was attended mostly by middle-aged white folks. In contrast, I’m an immigrant, part native American, part black, part Jew, part Roma (Gypsy). And I was afraid I’d get lynched for expressing support for the LUE by the comments made and the attitude expressed at the meeting, and what was told to me in private outside as we exited to the parking lot.

As a professional with a degree in architecture and urban planning, as an environmentalist since before it was fashionable, as a homeowner and basically life-long resident of Long Beach, where my siblings and I grew up and my adult children were raised, I had no choice but to come out in support of planned and orderly growth.

All cities that are alive, grow. Some grow in an anarchic fashion, some in an orderly and well-planned fashion. I’m all for the latter. The LUE, a work in progress for over 10 years, helps to ensure that. As much as some may feel drawn to an idyllic Norman Rockwell fairy tale existence, we cannot stop the growth. It’s an impossibility.

Would any of my neighbors, in order to limit growth in Long Beach, volunteer to move to Nunavut in Canada? No. Would any of my healthy active senior citizen neighbors (you, perhaps?) volunteer to get recycled a-la Soylent Green? No. Would any of you neuter your child or pass stringent child-bearing laws as China did in 1979? No. As long as our children and grandchildren continue to procreate, and the elderly continue to live productive lives, and California continues to be one of the top world economies, there will be growth.

Finally, would any City or major industry object to growth by immigration? No, most of our (California) major industries such as hospitality, construction, agriculture, manufacturing, and even IT and healthcare would collapse without immigrants, not to mention the inconveniences (poorly) presented in the film “A Day Without a Mexican”.

We all need a place to live, and it is irresponsible and unrealistic to think that each of us can have a single family home in the suburbs. The only thing that makes sense is higher density, particularly near mass-transit or transit corridors. Higher density is less wasteful of energy, has a lower impact on the environment, creates a more lively, walkable, and livable city.

Carlos, I suspect many folks are OK with the current allowed higher densities on the corridor streets, and maybe even higher density on those streets.
Are you in favor of a 3 or 5 story new building with 25 or 50 units and NO on-property parking? The proposed LUE has that if there is a bus line or 1/2 mile to a Metro Station and many think that is ridiculous.

After decades of fossil fuel destruction of the environment and a sea of asphalt increasing hydrocarbon pollution into the ocean I am in favor of limiting car parking as much as possible with a simultaneous increase in public transit, additional bike lanes, converting more streets in downtown and other neighborhoods to walking streets, and adding free solar powered EV charging stations to public parking lots.
Many may think it’s ridiculous but to me it’s a matter of necessity. People need to get off the couch on wheels and walk, bike, skateboard, or, dog forbid, take the bus or the train.

Carlos, I guess if we massively increased available public transportation at the cost of massive taxes, maybe your dream would come through.
A guy that works for me bought a ratty car for his 20 minute commute instead of the 75 to 90 minute bus ride. He values his family time.
My wife drives to downtown Los Angeles instead of taking the Blue Line because it’s so dangerous at 8:00pm or 9:00pm coming home.
BTW, why would we need EV charging stations if there was no place to park at home? (yes, I’m a EV supporter)

I rode the blueline to my office in downtown L.A. for years and still do occasionally for my commute to Santa Monica (with transfer to the Expo line). That nearly 2 hour commute by public transportation isn’t bad compared with the 1.5 hr commute by car with the related wear and tear (on the nerves, mostly). When I do this I take my laptop and work, read, or just nap. When I don’t take public transport I carpool 3/4 of the way and ride my bike the rest of the way. When possible, about half the time, I telecommute. Regarding EVs, whenever I mention EV most people think a regular car run by batteries in lieu of an internal combustion engine. A regular car, electric or not, is designed to carry at least 4 people and luggage from here to Santa Barbara to San Diego, yet we typically drive such vehicles with one person and at most a briefcase for a distance of 15 miles or so. That makes about as much sense as using a 16 lb sledge hammer to drive a thumbtack into a piece of Styrofoam. I’m thinking more like electric bicycles, scooters, skateboards, Segways, Hoverboards, and other more efficient, transportable, light-weight electronic means of personal transport. There are even some pretty cool looking electric “golf carts” perfect for urban transport that one can fit four in the space of one regular car parking stall.

Bill says:October 21, 2017 at 6:28 pm

Something tells me you spend your days watching CNN instead of working

Bill,
Everything I mentioned on this post that you’re responding to is direct experience, and, by the way, all related to work.
But if you must know, I scan through most of the major online periodicals from the US and abroad, about two dozen, left and right leaning, and that includes CNN and Fox, neither of which are good representatives of either the left or the right.

I’m a Mexican American older home owner and have no issues with planned growth for our city. As a person not originally from Long Beach, I guess I got in before the castle doors are closed to “outsiders”. This “build a wall” anti sanctuary meeting looks and sounds like a Trump rally.

I am not surprised this exists in Long Beach.

I am encouraged we have a young and diverse city council progressing to the future based on reality and not stuck in the last century.

I surmise that people are starting to get fed up with the liberal mess that Long Beach’s leadership has shoved down their throats and emptied their pockets to fund. Nice to hear of some push-back . . . even if it’s from fellow law-abiding, old, white people. But, hey . . . they got what they voted for.

Jim, as someone who has been at various times accused of being a liberal and a conservative; in other words someone that neither cares for or fully understands those labels, I’m curious, can you succinctly explain “liberal mess”?

build as high as you want in dtlb and along the blue line, all the way to dtla. respect our neighborhoods. our investments deserve respect. we donate our work, our elbow grease and most prescious of all our time to make LBC accomodating and liveable in every way. we can object and should to this LUE as written. it is an obuse of a power/property grab.

Terry Gross just did a great interview with Nikole Hannah-Jones who very accurately pointed out that the hardcore “diversity” crowd (ahem, yupsters, hipsters, urbanists) always talk about how they want diversity, but what they really want are people who are in the same socio-economic category, have the same values and are basically entirely the same as they are but with a different skin color. And when people are expected to really mesh with people who are in a completely different situation than them (i.e on welfare), they are no longer “tolerant”. Here’s the link, be careful about casting stones.http://www.npr.org/2017/10/13/557558468/how-the-systemic-segregation-of-schools-is-maintained-by-individual-choices

I’m not following how your Brooklyn education comparison translates to Long Beach land use. Long Beach is already diverse and affluent neighborhoods schools already have Latino and Black students enrolled. The amount of building in LB would have to be exponential to compare with anything in any part of New York City that has to do with race, education or anything. They don’t compare. .

My point is not directed at you, but Brian, who does a great job of keeping everyone updated on the progress of development downtown, but spends an inordinate amount of time judging people who have a different worldview from him on the other side of town. The interview discusses how sometimes those that preach the loudest about diversity don’t accept real diversity when it affects them and their investments. In this interview the investment was children, for people in East Long Beach it may be their houses. You don’t have to agree with them, but if this is an attempt to convince them of another point of view that they may not have thought about, it failed because no one is going to listen when you are constantly belittling them.

After seeing the nine minute video, I am changing my take on this particualar article.

I take the article as reporting on dissapointment that Long Beach residents approve of no new people coming to LB. (not that that can even happen)

After looking at the video, I heard the comment about LB not being a sanctuary city but I did not hear the roar approval that came with the approval from the crowd on that idea that LB should not attract new residents. A couple of people shouted support against santuary but I had to strain to hear it.

The audience point was basically no growth what so ever in Long Beach. Keep 2nd and PCH an eye sore and do not attract more people to Long Beach or find ways to accommadate an increasing housing demand. (not that that can even happen)

All though the audience was snow white I did not really hear anything that was overtly anti diversity. It was more of a NIMBY crowd.

Somebody who was there should clarify why they don’t want more units in LB. Is it parking, more traffic, affordable housing requirements, section 8 housing etc. NIMBY is not a good arguement.

I felt that Amy Bodek did a good job of presenting the issues with regard to who is doing the actual building.

The city is selling off land for development. That is for sure. Done deal right?

Alan, I think what they might have been saying is that development without a good people movement plan is a bad idea. These meetings should have been about public transportation plan to move people quickly and efficiently and then we can talk about building housing for them all. Without this type of plan, do you really want more people in Long Beach???

It already takes 30 minutes to cross town with NO traffic. More people, without a worthwhile quick and efficient transportation plan, will only make that number increase.

I don’t think this article has anything to do with diversity or NIMBYism. We are simply putting the cart before the horse. Some of the people in that crowd are old and wise enough to see it! That’s why they are speaking out.

I’m not sure why the people were there. It doesn’t seem to me that much if any development is coming to Whaley Park. The traffic circle is close but not even in their backyard.

Cross town traffic is a problem in any city and not everyone has to commute cross town. I would say that most people get on the freeway to go to work.

Accommodating parking in new development would be the biggest problem and improving overall transportation should be done on a constant basis through that city department. Development around town has already happened and is happening as the city sells off space. The toothpaste is out of the tube if the idea is to halt all new development.

Long Beach has improved every year since I have been here since 1988.

We are the last affordable large city on the coast. Don’t sell your property. And if it gets too much for people, someone will buy your property– no problem.

Keith, I don’t know about any of the recent meetings that have occurred. The ones I attended in my neighborhood in regards to the LUE and similar issues in the past have, without exception, been a vehicle for NIMBYism, and judging from the comments directed at me in private after the meetings, the NIMBYism is thinly veiled racism. This isn’t an isolated incident, as an architect with a decades-long caree focused mainly on affordable housing and public architecture I get to see this ALL the time. I am perhaps, as a person of color, a bit more sensitive to this issue, but all my colleagues in this business, regardless of color or social standing, see the same thing.

The same thing happened when discussing mass transit. I can distinctly recall a meeting I attended many years ago regarding the Blue Line. This meeting was held in Los Cerritos Elementary School just north of my neighborhood. The residents were up in arms and lined up to speak at the podium and for two minutes each, neighbor after neighbor, I got to hear about the “bad elements” coming into their neighborhood (Bixby Knolls/Virginia Country Club area), kidnapping their daughters, playing ghetto music, partying all night in the Metro parking lots, etc. Seems incredible, but it is no exaggeration.

As to the chicken-egg argument concerning public transportation before more housing, that’s not going to work either. There has to be demand, otherwise mass transit won’t come. Homeowners in well-to-do neighborhoods overwhelmingly objected to Greater L.A.’s light rail system before it was built because “nobody will ride it”. They’ve been proved wrong every single time. When traffic gets so bad that it makes sense to take a bus or a train, people will do that. This is what happens when I have to go to Santa Monica and my carpool partner isn’t available, I simply take the train (Blue Line + Expo Line). Eventually there will be a line along the 405 connecting OC with the Valley and I guarantee, as happened with the Blue Line, that ridership will exceed projections almost immediately.

It’s like watching a super liberal writer call everyone an angry white person because they care about jobs and property values.
If you want better schools and jobs add value. Nobody cares about immigration. People don’t want illegal immigrants that use the system.
Cut and dry bro. Hey off your high horse that never fixed anything in his life position.

Longbeacher, you’ve thrown a lot of meaningless labels that make it difficult to understand what your point is. As someone who has been called a “liberal” by some and a “conservative” by others, and then refuse to explain what that means, I have no idea what you’re talking about.

But let me go to your points. “If you want better schools and jobs add value.” Add value to what? Do you understand how/why our K-12 school system was the pride of the industrialized world and now it’s the laughingstock? Do you understand how/why a worker holding a factory job could buy a house and support a large family, by himself, and feel confident that his children would do better than he, and now that’s a pipe dream?

“Nobody cares about immigration.” Perhaps you’re the “nobody” that is the exception. POTUS cares. My gardener cares. My dot-com client cares. The contractor that’s building the buildings I design cares. My mechanic cares. I can’t name a single person who does not care.

“…illegal immigrants that use the system.” Perhaps you don’t read the news or don’t understand statistics. Strike the ‘perhaps’, it’s obvious. There isn’t a single scientific statistic that supports your contention. Immigrants, whether undocumented or not, contribute more than the use. Over the years 20 to 30 percent of Hispanics, including undocumented immigrants, have relied on some sort of welfare. The rate for native born Americans is about 60 percent. If you care to be educated, and prefer, like me, to get the facts straight from the horse’s mouth (not the talking heads on the left or right), go to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Good stuff Brian!! You hit the nail on the head. First thing I thought when I saw that photo at whaley was “wow that place could use a little color.” Very pale. Seems the “people” running this city are doing a questionable job. A lot of selling out. Its sad when money and greed control people. This city has potential! Heres to hoping the greedy ones can find their way (or get fired).